http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/components/fonts/spurs-webfont.woff
Convert the Woff to an OTF or TTF and your mission is complete....
Here's the original news from Dalton Maag (typographers)
http://www.daltonmaag.com/infoletter/35.html
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
http://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/components/fonts/spurs-webfont.woff
Convert the Woff to an OTF or TTF and your mission is complete....
Here's the original news from Dalton Maag (typographers)
http://www.daltonmaag.com/infoletter/35.html
I think you can find more useful stats by looking at things like how successful a system is over a lot of teams You're right, there are far too many unpredictable variables in football, however if you increase the sample size this unpredictability usually gets ironed out. For example we could use to stats to much more reliably predict how many goals we'll score next season than say what our two results against QPR will be.
I personally am not a huge fan of stats in football but I feel they're needed at times to shut up the people who vastly over exaggerate what they see with their own eyes.
And what about the people who havent seen a damn thing with their own eyes, because they missed the game, yet feel they have the right to debate a players performance because they read a pie chart..
Don't mind them mate. Keep em coming. No one, least of all you, said they are the be-all and-all, but they are interesting none-the-less. I appreciate the time you take to do these.
So what I'm hearing is that some people don't like Spreadsheets.
And what about the people who seldom watch a thing with their own eyes, think a pie chart is a diet tracker, yet flood the boards with utter bollocks about how players x and y are shit?
They are idiots too.
I have never seen a pie chart that did not offer wisdom to those that contrive to seek the truth.
What about them?
Its fucking annoying...like "the computer says no".
Stats are ok if they are used with perspective, a little balance and consistency. They never are though.
The same people using "win ratio" to determine our best defensive partnership, wrote off "win ratio" as meaningless for someone else...
Last edited:
Im not going to turn this thread into a manager comparison....my point is that stats are used generally by people when pushing their favourite players/managers.....then the same stats are used "taking x,y, and z into consideration" when they look good for someone less favourable.
This is another one of those typical times where you get to see exactly how people read a thread.
This happened previously with Gibbs, and a couple of people are doing it now - at no point in this thread has anyone, except in a blatant joke, said that the facts or figures prove, show, or have been used to push forward a point.
I said in the first post that these are just some figures for people that are interested to have a discussion around our defence this season (mostly the sheer number of rotations)....
..but as per normal, someone always pops up to try and argue a point that never existed in the first place
More importantly, it's clearly marked in the title that it's a stats thread - this obviously means that everyone wants to hear people banging on about how they don't like stats, of course....
This happened previously with Gibbs, and a couple of people are doing it now - at no point in this thread has anyone, except in a blatant joke, said that the facts or figures prove, show, or have been used to push forward a point.
I said in the first post that these are just some figures for people that are interested to have a discussion around our defence this season (mostly the sheer number of rotations)....
..but as per normal, someone always pops up to try and argue a point that never existed in the first place
More importantly, it's clearly marked in the title that it's a stats thread - this obviously means that everyone wants to hear people banging on about how they don't like stats, of course....
Translation: "discuss only if you agree"
I was just pointing out when I think stats are useful. People who do as you said have no proper perspective on the game I agree.
it wasn't originally though - was it?This is another one of those typical times where you get to see exactly how people read a thread.
This happened previously with Gibbs, and a couple of people are doing it now - at no point in this thread has anyone, except in a blatant joke, said that the facts or figures prove, show, or have been used to push forward a point.
I said in the first post that these are just some figures for people that are interested to have a discussion around our defence this season (mostly the sheer number of rotations)....
..but as per normal, someone always pops up to try and argue a point that never existed in the first place
More importantly, it's clearly marked in the title that it's a stats thread - this obviously means that everyone wants to hear people banging on about how they don't like stats, of course....
so thats the rule now, is it? Write stats in the thread title and it automatically becomes a wank fest where no-one disagrees with or debates whats presented?
I know you enjoy playing around producing meaningless tables of stats based on other peoples meaningless tables of stats, and whilst I don't get quite as tumescent as you do over them, I can appreciate that certain types of people love this kind of presentation.
The only issue I have with it all is the belief that some people have, that it will in some way foretell the future.
Mind you, I jump out of airplanes and slide down mountains on planks of wood to pass the time, how meaningless is that?
Last edited:
Yeah, it was in there from the beginning.
Stats never prove anything, it's up to people to discuss whether or not it supports or contradicts what they see on TV, but to get people, unfortunately like yourself, coming in and getting a bit annoyed just off the basis that the thread exists, well it's a bit unproductive.
People believe and do a lot of odd things in this crazy world, it's all about making them happy.
An example that contradicts a lot of the hate is how people pick on Soldado, slicing up his goals into 'easy pens' and 'open play', ignoring any other contributions, and adding in a transfer fee to condemn the man - it's easier to state that a transfer fee has just as little relevance to ability as the KPIs which are produced as a result of them.
Stats do have a place but it needs to be remembered that they can easily be misinterpreted. I didn't need stats to see Freddie Kanoute was a lazy cunt. My eyes told me that every game. Just saying......
:kaboul:
:kaboul:
I'm not annoyed at all, not sure why you think that.Yeah, it was in there from the beginning.
Stats never prove anything, it's up to people to discuss whether or not it supports or contradicts what they see on TV, but to get people, unfortunately like yourself, coming in and getting a bit annoyed just off the basis that the thread exists, well it's a bit unproductive.
People believe and do a lot of odd things in this crazy world, it's all about making them happy.
An example that contradicts a lot of the hate is how people pick on Soldado, slicing up his goals into 'easy pens' and 'open play', ignoring any other contributions, and adding in a transfer fee to condemn the man - it's easier to state that a transfer fee has just as little relevance to ability as the KPIs which are produced as a result of them.
I read some of this statistical analysis stuff and find some of it interesting
I just don't wholly believe in its value, other than that of historical interest.
I'm impressed that you find the time to do, or the will or inclination to do so.
Just don't see any real value in it, other than curiosity about numbers.
My only frustration is in the posters who think its the only way to assess or judge a players talent or value.
I would have thought that the player most people get confused over the value of is Bentaleb - some posters seem to think he's a cross between Messi, Pele and sliced bread, based on passing success and other oft quoted statistical titbits, as if it were proof positive that he's wonderful.
On the same basis some dorks were making the same case for the other middle eastern guy - the show pony who only ever did one impressive thing, and that was to score for QPR against us, claiming he was Zidane because he could do circus tricks, omitting his inability to actually play football.
No idea what his stats looked like. A pony probably.